Will Brexit really be good for Britain?

TrickyTree83

Arguing over interpretations to try to prove that the forecasts - which were quite explicit - were right or wrong seems stupid, just read them.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-treasury-analysis-the-immediate-economic-impact-of-leaving-the-eu

This document assesses the immediate economic impact of a vote for the UK to leave the EU.

A vote to leave would cause a profound economic shock creating instability and uncertainty which would be compounded by the complex and interdependent negotiations that would follow. The central conclusion of the analysis is that the effect of this profound shock would be to push the UK into recession and lead to a sharp rise in unemployment.

Two scenarios have been modelled to provide analysis of the adverse impact on the economy: a ‘shock’ to the economy, and a ‘severe shock’.

In the ‘shock’ scenario, a vote to leave would result in a recession, a spike in inflation and a rise in unemployment. After two years, the analysis shows that GDP would be around 3.6% lower in the shock scenario compared with a vote to remain. In this scenario, the fall in the value of the pound would be around 12%, and unemployment would increase by around 500,000, with all regions experiencing a rise in the number of people out of work.

In the ‘severe shock’ scenario, the rise in uncertainty, the effect on financial conditions and the transition effects are larger. The analysis shows that after two years the level of GDP would be 6% lower, the fall in the value of the pound would be 15% and unemployment would increase by around 800,000.

If negotiations with the EU took longer than two years to conclude or if the outcome were to be less favourable than expected, the UK economy could be subject to repeated and persistent rises in uncertainty which would depress further UK economic prospects.

Quite clearly HM Treasury is talking about the vote in those two scenarios and then goes on to talk about the negotiations separately in the last paragraph.

Can we stop arguing about interpretation now and agree that any forecast made based on the impact of the vote itself was quite obviously wrong. Saying "we've not left yet" does not make this treasury paper correct in its assertions, it's already wrong, we can't make it correct anymore no matter what we do, history is unalterable.

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

Does not answer the question as to why many Remainers AFTER the vote said we'd be in decline by Autumn and then by Xmas plus lots of other panic driven predictions

True. Many believed we would, and going by all of the evidence, and reading between the lines I'm not convinced we didn't. There's a temporary lull which was brought about in part by the lower GBP (which I disagree is a good thing), and some confidence due to Brexit being stalled.

But at the end of the day, we don't know anything yet, so no-one has really acted on anything, because there's nothing to act on. I assume most businesses have wasted hundreds of hours working out fallback plans though.

So I guess the best we can agree on is that the sky hasn't fallen in yet?

Graham_Devon

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Arguing over interpretations to try to prove that the forecasts - which were quite explicit - were right or wrong seems stupid, just read them.

Tried posting that.

2 on this forum insisted that the words "a vote to leave" actually meant when we leave....even if it's in black and white on the government website and that I was wrong to assume it's meaning.

So I posted up George Osbourne stating categorically that simply the vote to leave will cause immediate shockwaves..... again, I had assumed wrongly apparently, and he actually meant something else.

I was told there were other videos of Osbourne referencing what others were saying, but I'd have to find it myself. Funny that!

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Arguing over interpretations to try to prove that the forecasts - which were quite explicit - were right or wrong seems stupid, just read them.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-treasury-analysis-the-immediate-economic-impact-of-leaving-the-eu



Quite clearly HM Treasury is talking about the vote in those two scenarios and then goes on to talk about the negotiations separately in the last paragraph.

Can we stop arguing about interpretation now and agree that any forecast made based on the impact of the vote itself was quite obviously wrong. Saying "we've not left yet" does not make this treasury paper correct in its assertions, it's already wrong, we can't make it correct anymore no matter what we do, history is unalterable.

Wasn't exactly that argument based on that link shot down a few pages ago? I think there was selective quoting to make a point, but I don't have time to re-read it right now.

Graham_Devon

Herzlos wrote: »

Wasn't exactly that argument based on that link shot down a few pages ago? I think there was selective quoting to make a point, but I don't have time to re-read it right now.

It's not selective quoting and it wasn't shot down. You can't really carry out selective quoting when you link to the entire Government paper which people are free to click on and read for themselves.

It was simply people refusing to allow the written word to be read as intended.

Just referenced that in my post above.

Do you have a link to Cameron stating what you stated he had?

TrickyTree83

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Tried posting that.

2 on this forum insisted that the words "a vote to leave" actually meant when we leave....even if it's in black and white on the government website and that I was wrong to assume it's meaning.

So I posted up George Osbourne stating categorically that simply the vote to leave will cause immediate shockwaves..... again, I had assumed wrongly apparently, and he actually meant something else.

Quite clearly the people who disagreed with you are talking !!!!!!!!.

It says what it says, there is no interpretation of it. They made predictions based on what they knew at the time and what they believed the triggers to be.

I see no reference in the paper to Article 50, I fail to believe the civil servants and the Chancellor wouldn't be aware of A50 at the point of drafting this paper.

Anyone who disagrees with you on this for me is a charlatan posing as someone reasonable and intelligent. When words no longer mean what they do and goal posts can be moved ad-infinitum to suit a narrative or agenda I'll totally reject that version of reality, so should others whether they supported Leave or Remain. That is truly post-truth discourse.

melanzana

The Chief Negotiator in Brussels, Sir Ivan Rogers UK Ambassador to the EU has resigned.

He probably spoke realistically about the timeframe, given his vast EU experience and contact, and is now gone. The Tories did not like what he said obviously.

Need to find a Brexiteer in Whitehall pretty quick to replace him now! Is there one?? What a mess.

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

Cameron promised that if it was a leave vote, he'd trigger A50 "immediately". Most people took that to mean as soon as practically possible. The assumption being that it'd be within days rather than months.

May however took the reins and thought otherwise. Correctly consulting before giving all parties concerned proper notice.

Thrugelmir

melanzana wrote: »

The Chief Negotiator in Brussels, Sir Ivan Rogers UK Ambassador to the EU has resigned.

He probably spoke realistically about the timeframe, given his vast EU experience and contact, and is now gone. The Tories did not like what he said obviously.

Need to find a Brexiteer in Whitehall pretty quick to replace him now! Is there one?? What a mess.

Was leaving next November in any event. You'll never know what was said behind closed doors. Far better to have someone in position for the whole duration not part. Fresh face may have it's advantages too.

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

We've now got 3 separate events:

1. Leave vote - drop of GBP by about 20% - sounds pretty disastrous. Some jobs going away and some price rises, but nothing major.

2. Triggering of Article 50 - probably not much initially, a drop in GBP/stock market/investment as confidence wavers, but no-one will know any more and nothing much will happen.

3. Leaving date. Either by agreement being met or running out of time. This is when any excrement is likely to hit any ventilation systems.

Attaching everything to "Brexit" is sheer folly. Keep your eye on the bigger picture.